Is Gagne getting squeezed?

[Fatter than Joey]

I looked at that pitch data -- and according to the data

 

6% of the balls were actually strikes

20% of his called strikes were balls.

 

If anything Gagne has been lucky.

[Ennder]

So what that pitch f/x data shows is that about 23 strikes were called balls while he as on the mound so far. He is getting pinched overall. Some of those balls are blatant strikes, some are on the corners of a normal strike zone, a couple might be from having a small batter up etc. Obviously we'd have to compare it to your normal pitcher to get clean results but from a very simple diagnostic standpoint it looks weird to me.

[Postseason2006]

The problem I have is that the umpires were supposed to call the high strike but Gagme is not getting that call. I have seen countless Brewers called out on blatant low pitches below the knees.

[Fatter than Joey]

So what that pitch f/x data shows is that about 23 strikes were called balls while he as on the mound so far.

 

I disagree -- I don't think you can count the pitches that touch the lines in an argument to support "getting pinched"

 

You also need to look at how many called strikes were actually balls.

 

I only counted pitches that were entirely off the line -- 6% of his balls should have been strikes -- 20% of his balls should have strikes -- I don't see how anyone could reasonably conclude he is being pinched -- if you look at both the called strikes and the balls.

[rluzinski]

To be fair, you need to compare it to the strikezone umps actually call.

 

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/strike-zone-fact-vs-fiction/

 

FTJ, where did you find the lines on the strike zone? Remember, the top and bottom of the zone is actually set per batter, so you'd have to dig into the actually pitch f/x data to be fair up and down. I agree though, if the ball is one the line at all, it's a strike.

[Fatter than Joey]

FTJ, where did you find the lines on the strike zone? Remember, the top and bottom of the zone is actually set per batter, so you'd have to dig into the actually pitch f/x data to be fair up and down.

 

Yeah, I just assumed that the strike zone remained consistent. At most, only 6% of his balls are getting called wrong, and 20% of his called strikes are actually balls -- I realize this isn't CSI accurate, but at a quick glance, I'd conclude that there is not a lot of merit to the "Gagne squeeze conspiracy"

 

I agree though, if the ball is one the line at all, it's a strike.

 

I am saying if it's on the line it could go either way, and it's tough to build a case that a pitcher is getting squeezed if the pitcher is putting the ball on the border.

[TooLiveBrew]

You can't take some sort of statistical high-ground and lecture about small samples -- yet use arguments like "bad umping" as it has some merit.

 

I don't think I'm lecturing... I don't know what else to call 8 IP other than a small sample. I apologize for the patronizing tone.

[logan82]

Went back and watched Sunday's game. Gagne got squeezed, but it didn't look like it was for all the hitters. I think he has pretty poor control. Kendall moves his glove quite a bit when Gagne pitches. On the first hit Gagne gave up he missed by the width of the plate. Several times Kendall was set up at mid thigh and the pitch ended up at the letters. I am not saying it is right or fair, but when you miss your spots by that much I don't think you can count on getting the borderline pitches. He looked to be trying to get the hitters to swing at bad pitches and when they didn't, he was in trouble. He didn't really get hit very hard either. Only two balls made it out of the infield. One was a F9 and the other was a base hit up the middle.

[rluzinski]

To look at Gagne's walk rate and HR rate after 14 1/3 innings and expect them to hold steady would be a really bad bet. Both rates are literally off the charts:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/graphs/650_P_season_full_2_20080505.png

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/graphs/650_P_season_full_4_20080505.png

 

Unless you think Gagne has turned ino the worst pitcher ever to pitch in the majors, it's clear that Gagne's performance so far does not match his true talents. That's not a particularily bold claim, though, when the sample in question is so small and rates in question are so extreme.

 

Gagne has had terrible results so far. I don't see anything obvious indicating that his actual pitching has been as bad as the results, however. He has thrown 187 strikes to 117 balls, and I don't recall him being especially especially wild looking in any of his starts (even this last one). His velocity has been fine as well. Even if we just assume he's a league average reliever (around 4.0 ERA), the results are going to improve tremendously.

 

One month of results just doesn't tell us very much with regard to performance analysis. Before the season started, my opinion of Gagne was that he was a decent but not great reliever and I still feel that way.

[Bruce Ciskie]

We can use all the metrics we want, but this much is clear:

 

If Weeks makes the throw to first on the double-play ball in the Cardinal game, and the first-base umpire correctly calls Blom out Sunday, we're not having this discussion right now. And neither of those things are Gagne's fault.

[eanelson4]

We can use all the metrics we want, but this much is clear:

If Weeks makes the throw to first on the double-play ball in the Cardinal game, and the first-base umpire correctly calls Blom out Sunday, we're not having this discussion right now. And neither of those things are Gagne's fault.

 

You are also running under the assumption that he can actually get guys out without struggling after that. A good closer will shut the door down even after his defense falters him. Co-co loaded the bases yesterday against the Cubs yesterday yet still seemed to get Derek Lee to ground out (unlike anybody else in the league). Not saying I expect Gagne to be as good as co-co, however a $10 million closer should be able to shut the door if we only turn one out on a double play, or if he allows 1 runner on base.

[Fatter than Joey]

I don't think I'm lecturing... I don't know what else to call 8 IP other than a small sample.

 

I felt like you were talking about making projections from a 14 IP -- which I agree you can't do from a 14 inning sample. However, you certainly can look at his performance up to this point and discern whether it has been good or bad. The only two things I have focused on, are BBs and HRs -- which are not as luck dependent as BAA or ERA. Ultimately, when discussing relievers 50 IP is going to be a large sample, it is an inherent problem.

 

To look at Gagne's walk rate and HR rate after 14 1/3 innings and expect them to hold steady would be a really bad bet. Both rates are literally off the charts:

 

Russ -- I don't if this is addressed to me, or if you are just adding to the discussion -- however, I have never discussed future performances....

 

TLB, made a statement to the effect that "Gagne's performance does not match his results", speaking to the here and now -- I disagreed with that -- I think any reliever that puts up 10 BBs+4HR in 14 IP, is bound to be "off the charts", and subsequently is going to blow a lot of saves. The best way I can summarize Gagne so far, is that he deserves any and all heat he is getting, he cannot blame the defense or "luck" -- he has walked way too many batters and given up too many HRs.

 

Unless you think Gagne has turned ino the worst pitcher ever to pitch in the majors, it's clear that Gagne's performance so far does not match his true talents.

 

I would certainly agree that both his performance and results are below expectations - and there is no reason for him to be pitching this poorly.

 

I don't see anything obvious indicating that his actual pitching has been as bad as the results, however.

 

I disagree -- he has had a lot of problems locating his changeups, batters have been laying off the change, and sitting on his fastball.

 

Even if we just assume he's a league average reliever (around 4.0 ERA), the results are going to improve tremendously.

 

I got into a similar type of argument about Dave Bush last year -- I felt like Bush was getting his pitches over the plate a lot more than he should have, and was getting hit really hard as a result. I felt that his bad results were primarily the result of bad pitching and not bad luck, and then later in the year Bush started nibbling more and the BBs went up, and he hasn't pitched well since.

 

I was assured last year that Bush's ERA would be well under 5.00 last year, and that never happened.

 

If Gagne was giving up a ton of singles, I could really get behind the idea that Gagne would start regressing towards the mean, however I think reducing the BB rate and HR rate is a much taller order. I don't think Gagne will continue to pitch "off-the charts" bad, but he is going to have to make more than an incremental improvement, and I am not a big fan of expecting more than incremental improvements.

 

As a side note -- I think everything I have said about Gagne goes for Mota and McClung as well -- both of those guys have walked too many batters as well, and Mota has probably gotten very lucky. I think Riske, has the best chance of "regressing to the mean" -- and I think Stetter and Torres have been the best pitchers in the BP so far this year, and Torres so far has exceeded my expectations, and DM looks pretty good on the Torres deal.

 

Shouse should only be used against LHers, so any bad results he gets against RHers is on Yost.

[Fatter than Joey]

If Weeks makes the throw to first on the double-play ball in the Cardinal game, and the first-base umpire correctly calls Blom out Sunday, we're not having this discussion right now. And neither of those things are Gagne's fault.

 

Certainly the D hasn't helped Gagne either, but I'd still be whining about his BBs and HRs http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

 

Several times Kendall was set up at mid thigh and the pitch ended up at the letters. I am not saying it is right or fair, but when you miss your spots by that much I don't think you can count on getting the borderline pitches.

 

Good point Logan, some of the people I have watched the Brewers with this year have been exactly this comment.

[rluzinski]

It has to be great being a GM or owner of a small market team. Fans demand that their team signs known, free agents, even if that means they have to overpay to get them. "Not my money!" they love to say. But of course, they then spend the rest of the time judging the player based off that inflated salary.

 

Gagne is being paid like an elite closer. Gagne is not an elite closer. Didn't we already know that?

[bigredrobbo]

While I'm not thrilled at some of the performances this season so far, it's safe to say that that $10m albatross was always gonna be Gagne's problem with Brewer fans.

Unless he reverted to the 2004 version of himself, he had a target on his back the minute he joined us.

 

Sheets, Jenkins, Vargas, Hammonds and their like have all had their contracts held up for ridicule in a way that you just don't see as often with most other teams. It's no wonder that Cubs fans believe we'll never hold onto any of our stars because they know we expect Tiffany's performance at Dollar Store prices.

 

I'm not saying $10m is peanuts, but it's early in the only year that we are commited to. When age catches up with Coco, he'll be glad that he doesn't have to hear about the "$46m waste of a closer" in thread after thread from Brewer fans.

[Fatter than Joey]

It has to be great being a GM or owner of a small market team. Fans demand that their team signs known, free agents, even if that means they have to overpay to get them. "Not my money!" they love to say. But of course, they then spend the rest of the time judging the player based off that inflated salary. Gagne is being paid like an elite closer. Gagne is not an elite closer. Didn't we already know that?

 

What is your point? -- Clearly Gagne is not an elite closer -- however, I think there is a lot of middle ground in between "elite closer" and "leads MLB in blown saves"

[Bruce Ciskie]

What is your point? -- Clearly Gagne is not an elite closer -- however, I think there is a lot of middle ground in between "elite closer" and "leads MLB in blown saves"

 

Sure, and in this case, at least a goodly portion of that gap can be made up by taking into account a horrible defense that could probably make vintage Dennis Eckersley look like the closing version of Fausto Carmona. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[Fatter than Joey]

Sure, and in this case, at least a goodly portion of that gap can be made up by taking into account a horrible defense that could probably make vintage Dennis Eckersley look like the closing version of Fausto Carmona

 

The defense has nothing to do with the BB's and HR's he has given up. The defense contributes to the BS's and the ERA perhaps, but I think Gagne has done enough hole digging of his own, to warrant criticism.

 

I certainly agree the defense is not helping out any Brewer pitcher, and probably is the cause of global warming.

[eanelson4]

I certainly agree the defense is not helping out any Brewer pitcher, and probably is the cause of global warming.

 

I second that opinion

[rluzinski]

I was assured last year that Bush's ERA would be well under 5.00 last year, and that never happened.

 

You were assured by me (I'm certainly not speaking for that whole thread) that because of how bad Bush's start was in 2007, bad luck was almost certainly part of the culprit and as a result, he was bound to improve. Let's look at his first 10 starts and then the rest of the season:

 

10 Starts

3-5 RECORD

6.13 ERA

1.75 BB/9

6.71 K/9

1.17 HR/9

.304/.345/.492/.837 AGAINST

 

21 Starts

9-5 RECORD

4.62 ERA

2.31 BB/9

6.35 K/9

1.37 HR/9

.284/.335/.469/.804 AGAINST

 

His core stats (K, BB and HR) were actually a bit worse but he had better results with balls in play. His ERA improved because it was bound to improve. Nothing bold about that prediction.

 

I said this in the Bush thread last year and I'll say it again here: Look at the most unexpected performances a month or two into the season (in Bush's case, it was his ERA) and predict that it will be closer to preseason expectations going forward. You'll be right a lot more often than you'll be wrong and it's easy to prove statistically.

 

If Gagne was giving up a ton of singles, I could really get behind the idea that Gagne would start regressing towards the mean, however I think reducing the BB rate and HR rate is a much taller order. I don't think Gagne will continue to pitch "off-the charts" bad, but he is going to have to make more than an incremental improvement, and I am not a big fan of expecting more than incremental improvements.

 

Generally speaking, regression to the mean" isn't something you should sometimes not expect It is a fundamental law that needs to be adhered to when you are trying to extract "true skill" from a sample of results. Unless Gagne is hurt or has turned into a head case (and I don't believe either to be the case), it is much more likely that both those rates, going forward, will be closer to league average than to where they are currently.

 

Gagne (current):

6.14 BB/9

2.45 HR/9

 

NL Average (2007):

3.25 BB/9

1.02 HR/9

 

I know where I'd put my money. Where would you put yours?

 

What is your point? -- Clearly Gagne is not an elite closer -- however, I think there is a lot of middle ground in between "elite closer" and "leads MLB in blown saves"

 

I was responding to eanelson4, who seemed to be linking his expectations of Gagne to his salary.

[logan82]

It has to be great being a GM or owner of a small market team. Fans demand that their team signs known, free agents, even if that means they have to overpay to get them. "Not my money!" they love to say. But of course, they then spend the rest of the time judging the player based off that inflated salary.

 

Gagne is being paid like an elite closer. Gagne is not an elite closer. Didn't we already know that?

I generally think the oppostie way and I am sure others do as well. I hate the contract because a guy isn't as good as his contract(Suppan) instead of expecting a guy to play up to his contract.

[Bucky Rules]

Gagne is being paid like an elite closer. Gagne is not an elite closer. Didn't we already know that?

I think Gagne is being paid like a good closer who happened to be in free agency last year. Elite closers who were free (or re-done) coming into this season got much more. Cordero - 4yr/$46M; Rivera - 3yr/$45M; Joe Nathan - 4yr/47M.

[eanelson4]

I was responding to eanelson4, who seemed to be linking his expectations of Gagne to his salary.

 

Precisely. If Doug Melvin is willing to sink $10 million into a guy, I expect him to do well. We could have signed some middle of the road guy like Riske for $4 million to put in the closer role and hopefully go 9/14 on save opportunities. The extra $6 million comes from the team demanding results. If a guy is getting paid well to do a job, he should perform. If he is not, move on (or in this case we have Gagne for a 1 year contract). In the case of Suppan's ridiculous contract, you have to blame the inflated market for starters. Closers, however, only have to pitch 1 inning, maybe 2, so I think there are many more players out there that would make capable closers than there are that would make capable starters.

 

I think Gagne is being paid like a good closer who happened to be in free agency last year. Elite closers who were free (or re-done) coming into this season got much more. Cordero - 4yr/$46M; Rivera - 3yr/$45M; Joe Nathan - 4yr/47M.

 

I have a few problems with this statement:

1) Yes, his is being paid like a good closer, but he hasn't been one, which is the problem. Time will tell here, hopefully he gets it together

2) $12M is not that much more than $10M. It is documented that had Melvin known that the Reds only offered Cordero $2-3M more per year than the brewers that he would have done it. My point is that we could be paying a guy far less, and save some money for later years or something, to do the job that Gagne has done so far. Again, time will only tell though.

 

 

Overall, I just fail to see how we can completely ignore the size of a guy's contract. That is a judge of their abilities. If they get paid large sums of money, we should expect results, especially when we don't have enough money to overpay players like the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Dodgers, etc. Thats my thought on why I keep bringing up the money aspect of it.

[TooLiveBrew]

In the case of Suppan's ridiculous contract, you have to blame the inflated market for starters.

 

The market is inflated for every position, not just one. DM had to overpay to get Gagne here. Sure, he could have done a 2-yr./$16 mil. deal, but that is significantly more risky. The timing was right for the Gagne deal imo.

 

Yes, his is being paid like a good closer, but he hasn't been one, which is the problem

 

The problem imo is that you're basing an assesment on 8-10 IP, instead of his full career.

 

 

My point is that we could be paying a guy far less, and save some money for later years or something, to do the job that Gagne has done so far. Again, time will only tell though.

 

It's a one year contract. There is no reason to not spend the money in what's really the last year that all the young guys are really cheap. Saving $3-4 mil. to have someone even worse than Gagne doesn't make much sense to me. Unless you're convinced that his most recent 8-10 IP indicate an extreme injury or change in talent, there's no way you could have a guy that much cheaper than Gagne match what he'll likely produce.

[Invader3K]

Like others have said, we overpaid Gagne for a relatively low risk one year of service. I think it made sense, given the limited amount of other options out there.

 

Really, though, I don't like the idea of trying to pin all the Brewers' woes on one player. Like I've said elsewhere, people simply have the tendency to point the figure at the last guy with the ball, though.